Freethought & Rationalism Archive

John A. Broussard · 04-06-2005, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IAsimisI

when I say that it is inspired and not dictated by God is that the process of it's writting and compilation was guied by God. And as such everything in it is without error.

Let's see now.

"Inspired" doesn't mean "dictated" but means "guided."

Since "everything in it is without error," what difference does it make whether it was inspired, dictated or guided?

Aren't we just engaging in more word-play here?

Toto · 04-06-2005, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StaticAge

Could the answer be that Jesus lacked the perspective of sinful human existence and that the bible is supposed to be "the word of god," yes, but also able to appeal to sinful humans? Using human authors, the bible retains the human element, something people could identify with if they chose to. Being imperfect, the writers faced trials and pressures similar to our own, in some cases writing about their own feelings and struggles. Who but an imperfect human could write about such things?

So a perfect being lacks the ability to communicate with the rest of us? What was Jesus supposed to be saying?

StaticAge · 04-06-2005, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

So a perfect being lacks the ability to communicate with the rest of us? What was Jesus supposed to be saying?

That isnt what I said at all. I just said that humans may relate easier to human accounts than had the bible been written by divine creatures free from sin and death. The law of moses for example is supposed to have come directly from God, the tablets of the ten commandments even written by "the hand of God." Yet the psalms carry much more meaning for many, written by sinning imperfect persons. Even as simple literature, the Mosaic law is hardly as valued as the poetry of books like Ecclesiastes or Psalms etc.

John A. Broussard · 04-06-2005, 12:04 PM

This may be a minor point, but isn't there somewhere in the new testament where Jesus writes something in the sand? If true, that should establish his literacy and eliminate one reason (illiteracy) as the reason why he didn't write an autobiography.

Amaleq13 · 04-06-2005, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John A. Broussard

This may be a minor point, but isn't there somewhere in the new testament where Jesus writes something in the sand? If true, that should establish his literacy and eliminate one reason (illiteracy) as the reason why he didn't write an autobiography.

"This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not." (John 8:6, KJV)

Mathetes · 04-06-2005, 01:16 PM

That passage in John is spurious, but in Luke 4:16-20 Jesus appears reading a fragment from Isaiah in the synagogue of Nazareth.

So yes, the literary character Jesus in the gospel story could read (and presumably write).

goozlefotz · 04-06-2005, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wala

Why didn’t Jesus write the Bible?

Jesus didn’t leave a single written word behind. What does it say?

<snip>

Jesus did not see himself as the head of a new religion - that was Paul's idea. Also, there was no need to write anything down as they thought that the rapture was imminent. It was only years later, when the followers realized that they probably would not live to see Jesus' return, did they decide to write a history of the events. The book of John was not written until about 150 years later and was an attempt to codify the idea that Jesus was a God.

Dave G

StaticAge · 04-06-2005, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goozlefotz

Jesus did not see himself as the head of a new religion - that was Paul's idea. Also, there was no need to write anything down as they thought that the rapture was imminent. It was only years later, when the followers realized that they probably would not live to see Jesus' return, did they decide to write a history of the events. The book of John was not written until about 150 years later and was an attempt to codify the idea that Jesus was a God.

Dave G

is that really true? Didnt Jesus institute a new covenant with his disciples on the night of his death?

Damian · 04-06-2005, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

With God, All Things Are Possible.

Seriously, Damian, Jesus did not have nails through his hands for most of his life, and while there were no dictaphones, there was a well established profession of scribe - someone who writes down the words of another. Paul's letters are assumed to have been dictated to a scribe.

Hopefully you caught that I was joking. It's hard to tell from your response

Toto · 04-06-2005, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damian

Hopefully you caught that I was joking. It's hard to tell from your response

Actually, I didn't. Your response made as much sense as some perfectly "serious" stuff we get here.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-06-2005, 12:04 PM	#34
John A. Broussard Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Hawaii Posts: 6,629	This may be a minor point, but isn't there somewhere in the new testament where Jesus writes something in the sand? If true, that should establish his literacy and eliminate one reason (illiteracy) as the reason why he didn't write an autobiography.

04-06-2005, 01:16 PM	#36
Mathetes Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Spaniard living in Silicon Valley Posts: 539	That passage in John is spurious, but in Luke 4:16-20 Jesus appears reading a fragment from Isaiah in the synagogue of Nazareth. So yes, the literary character Jesus in the gospel story could read (and presumably write).

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.